F 1926 
.K28 
Copy 1 




tEfje Republic of 2|attt of &ooaj> 



m 



$rofes#or Carl Helsiep 



/ 



©HUH) an Jfntrobuctton bp 

Boctor GTfjomasi €. (^reen 



1922 



ADDRESS 



ON 



The Republic of Haiti of Today 



BY 

CARL KELSEY 

Professor of Sociology in the University of Pennsylvania 

WITH AN 

INTRODUCTION 

BY 

DOCTOR THOMAS E. GREEN 



DELIVERED BEFORE THE 

SOCIETY of the SONS of the REVOLUTION 
in the DISTRICT of COLUMBIA 



On April 29, 1922 



PRINTED FOR THE SOCIETY 

WASHINGTON 

1922 



H 



This paper is one of a series of 
important historical papers that 
have been delivered before the 
Society and found of sufficient 
value to be published. 



t uxoe 

SSP 23 ft** 



Itrtozfjr 



Sntrobuctton 

Mr. President, Gentlemen of the Society: 

OUR meeting tonight commemorates 
not merely the crowning work of the 
Revolution, nor indeed does it recall 
merely the honor paid to that great man who 
had come out of the struggle for indepen- 
dence with a record unique in history: 
" First in War, First in Peace, and First in 
the hearts of his fellow citizens." There is 
something more to be commemorated with 
this anniversary of the Inauguration of 
George Washington as the first President of 
the United States, on April 30, 1789. 

It commemorates the successful func- 
tioning of the Constitution of the United 
States of America — the document which 
William E. Gladstone called "the most 
wonderful work ever struck off at a given 
time by the brain and purpose of man." 

Reverence for that Constitution ought to 
be the corner-stone of the political faith of 
every loyal American. All that we are, 
and all that we ever may be as an influence 
for righteousness among men depends upon 
our devotion to the great fundamental ideas 
that the founders of our nation enunciated in 
our Constitution. 

When James Russell Lowell, our Ameri- 
can poet — himself more than an ordinary 
statesman — met Francois Guizot, the French 
philosopher, historian, and prime minister to 



Louis Phillipe, the Frenchman asked the 
representative of new world philosophy: 
"How long do you think the American 
Republic will endure?" Lowell answered: 
"So long as the ideas of its founders con- 
tinue to be dominant in the hearts of its 
people." And the Honorable Joseph Story, 
of the Supreme Court, said: "This Consti- 
tution is reared for immortality, if the work 
of man may justly aspire to such a title. It 
may, nevertheless, perish in an hour by the 
folly or corruption or negligence of its only 
protectors, the people." 

The men who builded this Constitution 
were prophets. Not merely were they 
idealists, . dreaming dreams incapable of 
realization, but out of the study of the 
dynamic forces that had made and marred 
previous civilization, with all the deliberate- 
ness of one who should fit together the 
intricate parts of an elaborate machine, they 
constructed a concrete Governmental plan 
whose object was not simply the creation 
of a confederation between thirteen scat- 
tered differing, more or less jealous and an- 
tagonistic, states, from whom the unity of 
action that war entailed had been taken 
away. 

It is worth remembering that Article I 
of the Treaty of Paris, signed September 3, 
1783, which brought the War of the Revo- 
lution to a close, expressly says: "His 
Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said 
United States," and here each state is 
mentioned by name "to be Free, Sovereign 
and Independent States, and he treats with 
them as such." 



The fathers of the Constitutional Con- 
vention were intent upon something far 
greater than confederation. They were 
working out their idea drawn from a careful 
study of the history of mankind as of what 
sort a nation ought to be, that should 
answer to the broadest and the highest 
aspirations of mankind. 

They built that idea into the words of 
the Constitution, and so conscious were they 
of what they were doing that when they 
sought a design for a Great Seal they put 
upon it an unfinished pyramid, significant 
of the fact that their ideal had not yet 
reached its culmination, but above it they 
wrote what was the intense conviction of 
their souls: "Novus ordo Seclorum" — "a 
new order of the ages." 

With the inauguration of its first Presi- 
dent, a single federal nation stepped upon 
the stage of history. The period from 1783 to 
1789 was not only one of cardinal importance 
to mankind, but what has been called by a 
distinguished historian: "the critical period 
of American history." These six years were 
the most crucial of any in all of our past. 

Yorktown brought us our independence, 
but Yorktown did not secure for us our 
national life. Both national and inter- 
national confusion reigned at the close of the 
great conflict, as it always does at the end 
of war. The Articles of Confederation, 
designed to create a perpetual Union be- 
tween the States, proved to be utterly in- 
adequate and without binding force. Con- 
troversies with foreign powers, as the con- 



troversy that arose with Spain over the 
Mississippi River, had nothing fundamental 
to which to make an appeal. 

Treaties were violated. Each state main- 
tained its own army. States trespassed 
upon each other's rights and disregarded 
each other's laws. Business conditions 
were utterly demoralized. There was no 
uniformity of value so far as money was 
concerned, nor was there any authority ap- 
parently for the collection of the excessive 
taxes. There were no trade regulations, 
scarcely any community of interest, no 
judicial power to enforce such regulations as 
were recognized. The days were of such 
tumult and uncertainty, of such disputation 
and confusion, as to justify the words of 
Robert Morris: "that the affairs of America 
were at their darkest." 

It was in the midst of such conditions as 
this that the far-sighted genius of Washing- 
ton, upheld and cooperated with by the best 
and most patriotic of his advisers and col- 
laborators, saved to the American people in 
peace what they had won in war. Under 
this inspiration America developed from 
confusion and chaos, avoiding on the one 
side a loose confederation that could not 
have failed of disintegration, and on the 
other side an attempt to form merely a 
nation out of constituent and loosely molded 
fragments. 

The vast wisdom of the plan was evi- 
denced by the fact that it chose — not the 
title " National Government"; not the title 
" Union of States," but the title "THE 
GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED 



STATES." It was just this touch of far- 
seeing wisdom that taking the long strug- 
gling series of Republics fringing the At- 
lantic Coast — mutually jealous, mutually 
suspicious, politically and economically di- 
vided, and yet each one of them — under the 
Declaration of Independence — Free and 
Independent States, called them together in 
what was in reality an International Con- 
ference, in Independence Hall in Phila- 
delphia, where in 1776 the Declaration of 
Independence was signed, and builded of 
them a Nation. 

I doubt if George Washington himself 
was as far-seeing in his constructive states- 
manship as were some of the greater scholars 
by whom he was surrounded. But Wash- 
ington had developed, during the war of the 
Revolution, into a keen and far-sighted 
commander of troops, a sagacious and 
recognized leader of men. During the war, 
with its many reverses and many mistakes, 
lie had learned the great necessity of unity 
and now in peace his fears were constantly 
drawn to the danger through the separation 
of the states or groups of states from each 
other. 

His strategy had always been directed 
toward the maintenance of free lines of com- 
munication between the various colonies. 
Owing to the absence of great sources and 
depots of munitions, the constant lack of 
great store of provisions and equipment, this 
was essential. Washington realized this 
when he centered men and action along the 
Hudson River. 



To keep open the line of the Hudson, 
when New York Bay was held by the 
British, was most important, because to 
close it meant to cut the states apart. Thus 
we see Washington writing to D'Estaing: 
"All of our supplies are drawn from the 
States westward of Hudson's River. Secure 
communication across that river is in- 
dispensably necessary. The enemy being 
masters of navigation would interrupt this 
essential intercourse between States." That 
the British were so completely masters of 
navigation constantly disturbed Washing- 
ton. He writes to Lafayette: " Without a 
decisive naval force, we can do nothing 
definite, but with it, we can do everything 
honorable and glorious." 

In 1777, when the British failed in their 
attempt to cut off New England, when 
Burgoyne's effort from Canada ended in 
his surrender in the fall of that year, great 
events followed. 

The French people were not indifferent, 
even in the beginning, to what was going on 
on this side of the Atlantic. At almost the 
outset of our struggle, munitions came to 
Washington from France — secretly of 
course — and French officers passed into 
our service without hindrance from their 
Government. 

The influence, the work, the skillful - 
management of Beaumarchais and his 
French associates, in providing guns, am- 
munitions, and money for the American 
Army, when skies were darkest, and hope 
was almost lost, form an episode in the 
relations between France and the United 



States that is too little known and too 
seldom remembered. 

Following Burgoyne's surrender, how- 
ever, France openly declared war against 
England, and on February 6, 1778, the 
Franco-American alliance was signed. In 
that Treaty, France expressly renounced 
any claim to recover her lost territory of 
Canada and Nova Scotia, and in this respect 
foreshadowed the American political theory 
later known as the Monroe Doctrine. 

That alliance gave to our cause what above 
all was most needed — a sea power to 
counter-balance that of England. France, 
under the enlightened policy of Louis XVI, 
had spent much time and money on the 
rehabilitation of her Navy. From Toulon, 
on April 13, 1778, there sailed the Fleet of 
Count D'Estaing, destined for America, his 
objective to wrest, if possible, from the 
British, the control of the Atlantic Sea. 

Unforeseen and unfavorable circum- 
stances, including the lengthy voyage to the 
Delaware Capes, interfered with D'Esta- 
ing's success — and, after the summer had 
been spent in fruitless manoeuvers in the 
North Atlantic, in November he sailed to 
refit his fleet in the West Indies. 

He encountered the British Fleets with 
varying success during that winter and the 
spring of 1779, when word reached him of the 
capture by the British of Savannah, with 
urgent appeals for his return to American 
waters. He had orders in hand directing 
his return to France, but he did not obej^ 
them. From the French Colonies in the 



West Indies he refitted his fleet in men and 
supplies and sailed for Savannah. 

Tonight, we are to hear something of 
Haiti. It was then known as the Island of 
Sainte Dominique, a French possession. 
D'Estaing embarked at Sainte Dominique, 
with 800 mulattoes and blacks. These sons 
of Haiti came to America and shed their 
blood in the effort of the French and Amer- 
ican troops to recover Savannah from the 
British. Amongst those Haitiens who 
fought under our Flag were Beauvais, 
Rigaud, Chauvannes, Jourdain, Christophe, 
Lambert, and others later distinguished in 
the subsequent struggles of their own coun- 
trymen for independence. 

In Jones' History of Georgia, the Franco- 
American forces operating before Savannah 
in the fall of 1779 are listed. The Division 
of D'Estaing included 156 Volunteer Grena- 
diers from Cape Francois, 545 Volunteer 
Chasseurs from Sainte Dominique, and 
these included troops from Port-au-Prince 
and the Cape, as Cap Haitien was then 
known. 

As we are to hear something of modern 
Haiti tonight, this earlier history is certainly 
of interest, with its reminder of the obli- 
gation we owe to these volunteers in our 
struggle for Freedom. 

It is furthermore well to remember, as 
we are to consider our obligations and 
responsibilities in connection with our pres- 
ent day problems in Haiti and Santo 
Domingo, the days when the whirligig of 
fate had brought Napoleon Bonaparte to 
the headship of France. 

10 



The peculiar though consistent states- 
manship of John Adams had led the United 
States to where she was almost making 
common cause with England against her 
earlier ally — for Napoleon by the Treaty of 
San Ildefonso had obtained a return from 
Spain of title and possession to Louisiana, 
the vast tract that La Salle had discovered 
in his wide voyaging down the Mississippi 
to the Gulf. 

Napoleon's dream of Empire had narrowed 
itself to the establishment at New Orleans 
of a French-Colonial administration that 
should cramp alike the expanding strength 
of the new republic, for Napoleon was none 
too friendly to the United States, and again 
checkmate England, the hereditary enemy 
of France. 

I say we do well to remember that, in 
1802, Thomas Jefferson said: "If France 
takes possession of New Orleans it means 
that we marry ourselves with the British 
Navy and the British Nation/' and that 
France was prepared to take that posses- 
sion, — its expedition assembled, its ships 
loaded, its plans for sailing completed. 

Then there came word from Santo Do- 
mingo that the blacks under Toussaint 
L'Ouverture had risen against the French as 
before they had stood for the French, and 
had declared their independence. The ex- 
pedition that was intended for New Orleans 
was loaded with soldiers instead of col- 
onists and under Napoleon's brother-in-law, 
LeClerc, sailed for Santo Domingo. 

Between Napoleon and his dream of 
empire overseas there stood the battalions 

11 



of a generation of heroic blacks throwing off 
the yoke of slavery. 

Toussaint L'Ouverture and the men of 
Haiti and Santo Domingo re-inforced by 
yellow fever and dominated and directed, 
we believe, by the Providence of Almighty 
God, saved the United States from what 
would have been a world-wide and an age 
long catastrophe, a war with France, and 
flung her eminent domain across the con- 
tinent and spread her beneficent control 
from ocean to ocean. 

We should remember this indebtedness 
as we think these days about our duty to 
the people of this island, who need in a 
marked degree our sympathy and our 
friendly cooperation. 

Our present problems in Haiti have re- 
ceived not alone the study of our officials 
and statesmen, but of such great non- 
partisan organizations as the American 
Academy of Political and Social Science. 
We have with us tonight, as our principal 
speaker, Professor Carl Kelsey, who served 
for sixyearsas Secretary of that organization 
and is now its Vice-President. More than 
a year ago, he very quietly undertook for 
his organization, and under the direction of 
Dr. Leo S. Rowe, Director of the Pan- 
American Union, the President of the 
Society, an investigation into conditions in 
Haiti. 

Mr. President, and Gentlemen of the 
Society, it gives me much pleasure to in- 
troduce as the speaker of the evening, Pro- 
fessor Carl Kelsey, of the University of 
Pennsylvania. 

12 



W&e Republic of Haiti of ®obaj> 

BETWEEN Cuba and Porto Rico there 
lies a beautiful tropical island about 
as large as the state of South Carolina, 
which we call indiscriminately either Santo 
Domingo or Haiti. The eastern two-thirds 
of the island forms the territory of the 
Dominican Republic, the western third is 
Haiti. The country as a whole is extremely 
mountainous, although there are several level 
plains on the seashore and one in the in- 
terior. 

The history of the island is both fasci- 
nating and tragic. Here Columbus made 
his first settlement. Here the native In- 
dians were found to be owners of gold and 
the desire of the Spaniards for more of the 
yellow metal led the chiefs to say that they 
would plant a belt of manioc across the 
island and give it to the Europeans, but that 
it was impossible to meet the demand for 
gold. Here as a result of the contact with 
the white man the natives died out so 
quickly and completely that one rarely 
sees any trace of their blood in the faces of 
the present inhabitants, and but few of their 
place names have survived. It cannot be 
said of Haiti as has been well said of 
America as a whole: "Our names are writ 
upon your waters, Ye cannot wash them 
out." Here the good bishop Las Casas 
grieving over the fate of the Indians recom- 
mended the introduction of Negroes from 

13 



Africa and thus fastened the curse of slavery 
on the new world. Here the French de- 
veloped the most valuable tropical colony 
of the XVIII Century and by the labor of 
slaves turned the fertile Plain of the North 
into a vast garden which supplied great 
quantities of sugar, cotton, indigo, and other 
products to Europe, of which you will find 
detailed accounts in the pages of Moreau 
St. Mery if you are sufficiently curious. 
Roads were built, irrigation works estab- 
lished, steam pumps installed, all of which 
fell into decay with the passing of system, 
just as did the Roman improvements in 
England when the legions were recalled. 

Suddenly the scene changes. The French 
are gone. Some 450,000 Negroes and 28,000 
mixed bloods, if we may trust St. Mery, find 
themselves practically alone on the ship of 
state, headed for the Utopia called Democ- 
racy, whose exact location is a bit uncertain 
but towards which the powerful winds, 
"liberty, equality, and fraternity," must 
surely bear the bark. Gone are the whites, 
gone the white color from the flag. To make 
certain that they return not no foreigner is 
to be allowed to own Haitian soil. 

The scene shifts again. A century has 
intervened. Just before eight o'clock one 
morning you and I are standing in front of 
the beautiful palace built to replace one 
destroyed ten years ago when a former 
president demonstrated that there were 
certain dangers connected with a residence 
above a powder magazine. A squad of 
gendarmes and a band are making ready to 

14 



raise the Haitian flag, when, without warn- 
ing, there comes to us the strains of The Star- 
Spangled Banner, immediately followed by 
the Haitian National Air. Ere we recover 
from our surprise we see not far away a 
company of gendarmes drilling under a 
white officer, while in the other direction 
across the Champs de Mars there marches a 
company of American Marines. What has 
happened to the black ship of state which 
set sail but a paragraph ago? 

The story is long. The answer is short. 
Shibboleths do not make nations. They 
may be useful as pass-words but as founda- 
tion stones they are valueless. Haiti is not 
the only place on earth where it has been 
sought to rival the superstructure of some 
other country without troubling to lay 
first an adequate foundation. A brief sum- 
mary of the existing situation will help us to 
understand. 

The population of the country is about 
2,000,000, nearly all of whom are of unmixed 
Negro ancestry. There are only a few 
hundred whites in the country, if we leave 
out of account the two thousand American 
Marines and the six hundred French men 
and women who are there as missionaries. 
The natives may be divided into two 
groups. The first includes not over five 
percent of the total. These can read and 
write French and may be said to have 
adopted European culture standards. Many 
are well educated. In politeness and 
courtesy they are often our superiors. This 



15 



group has almost complete control of the 
country. 

The ninety-five per cent of the people 
who form the second group are sunk in 
ignorance and poverty. They have many 
excellent traits, as do other primitive folks. 
They are kind-hearted and generous, faith- 
ful, and loyal. They work hard according 
to their standards, and are so busy keeping 
body and soul together that they rarely 
question the decisions of the first group. 
In fact, though they are free to come and go 
and in theory may aspire to any position in 
the country, they are little better than bond- 
servants. Privation and suffering is their 
lot. They are utterly indifferent as to 
matters political provided they may be 
undisturbed in their own work. "Am I not 
here?" is their common answer to the 
question, "How are you?" Irregularly fed 
and scantily clothed, always suffering, they 
are easily persuaded to follow any leader 
who promises better things. 

Given this situation with its background 
of slavery and it is not hard to understand 
the difficulties encountered by the Haitian 
government. The upper classes of Haiti 
have no work ideal. They are the elect to 
be cared for by the common herd. The 
result is that there are always more people 
seeking public berths than there are berths. 
There are always more people interested in 
upsetting a given government than in main- 
taining it. Hence, it need not surprise us 
that only two or three Haitian presidents 
have ever served their full terms and that 



16 



practically all have been everthrown by 
revolution. A series of constitutions, some 
twelve in number, has not served to change 
the situation. The trouble does not lie in 
the plan of government, which is very similar 
to our own, nor in the laws which are based 
on those of France, but in the attitude of 
the people themselves. 

Democracy has been but a name in Haiti. 
Elections have but given a paper title to the 
man who had shown that he was in control. 
Patriotism has consisted in antagonism 
towards the outside world and in the effort 
to secure position for self. Self-sacrifice for 
the state has been rare. I do not question 
for a moment that there have been, and are, 
men of broader vision than this, but they 
have been lost in the crowd. Practically 
every man has sought to profit for himself 
and has believed that everyone else was 
doing the same. 

It requires little exercise of the imagina- 
tion to picture the result. There is in Haiti 
an attitude of suspicion and doubt toward 
fellow man which makes cooperation im- 
possible. Each man thinks that he alone is 
fit to govern. Admiral Caperton's account 
of an interview with Bobo and Dartiguenave 
is to the point: "Dr. Bobo, if Senator Darti- 
guenave is elected president, will you help 
him loyally and earnestly in his efforts to 
benefit Haiti? " "No, I will not," shouted 
Bobo. "If Senator Dartiguenave is elected 
president I will not help him. I will go 
away and leave Haiti to her fate. I alone 
am fit to be president of Haiti ; I alone under- 



17 



stand Haiti's aspirations; no one else is fit 
to be president but me; there is no patriotism 
in Haiti to be compared with mine; the 
Haitians love no one as they love me." 
When Dartiguenave was elected Bobo 
went away and instead of leaving Haiti to 
her fate tried to start a revolution. This 
little incident marks a fundamental differ- 
ence between our concept of government and 
that which obtains in Haiti. For all I know 
Mr. Bryan may have felt as did Bobo but 
Mr. Bryan does not believe in revolution 
any more than he does in evolution. Until 
Haiti gets a vision of government by law and 
of respect for public opinion there can be no 
hope of stopping the revolutions which have 
cursed her career. 

Now revolutions have causes like other 
social phenomena and even if we were to 
admit that every Haitian revolution had 
ample justification we are but reversing the 
picture and observing that the actions of 
government must be regulated by law for the 
benefit of all and not conducted for the profit 
of the office holders. 

This attitude towards government has 
done more than cause personal rivalry 
between different aspirants for power. It 
has made the army the one great national 
institution of Haiti. I do not mean that it 
has made for an efficient army but it has 
forced the president to think most of the 
means for protecting himself against his 
enemies and has meant armed revolutions 
rather than battles of ballots. The evil 
results of this condition have been seen and 



18 



described by able Haitians, such as the late 
Frederick Marcelin, who wrote: " As long 
as the army remains what it is with us, the 
only national institution, the only one before 
which everyone must bend and bow, which 
absorbs everything, both money and men, 
which levels everyone under its domination, 
nothing good, nothing useful can be ac- 
complished." 

' Another result of this attitude must be 
mentioned. It makes impossible a sound 
financial policy. As the price of French 
recognition Haiti was saddled at the outset 
with a goodly debt. This debt has been 
greatly increased by the presidents who, 
fearing overthrow, have borrowed regardless 
of interest rates to overcome the enemy or 
to provide for future support in exile. It has 
been increased by the revolutionary leaders 
who made lavish promises to be redeemed 
at the expense of the treasury in case they 
were successful. I regret to add that the 
evidence indicates that in many instances 
public officials have diverted funds to their 
private purses. On paper the present in- 
debtedness of Haiti approximates $35,- 
000,000, but if advantage could be taken of 
the favorable rate of exchange and the debt 
refunded the total would be about $20,- 
000,000. It is impossible to give exact 
figures as there are important internal 
claims as yet unsettled. 

The income of Haiti is derived almost 
wholly from import and export duties. For 
the last ten years the total income has 
averaged under $5,000,000. The running 
expenses have averaged over $3,500,000. Of 



19 



this sum about $350,000 has been spent on 
schools. Although the interest on the 
foreign debt has been paid the government 
was over $2,000,000 behind on the amorti- 
zation in 1915 and greatly in arrears on 
salaries and other internal obligations. 
Even if we assume that careful and honest 
collection of both custom duties and internal 
revenue be secured it is evident that the 
sum total is inadequate for the needs of the 
country. Haiti is, and for some time has 
been, bankrupt. No wonder that a former 
president translated the miserere of the 
Mass "nous avons de misere," we are 
miserable. In a word it is impossible for 
Haiti to maintain her obligations, to develop 
schools, roads, public health, and other 
fundamentals with her present income. It 
is likewise out of the question to increase 
the burden of taxation to any great extent. 
Even if the upper class, which has dodged 
nearly all taxes in the past, paid its full share 
it is numerically so small that the increase in 
revenue would not be large. Until some 
way can be found to increase the production 
of wealth the most that Haiti can hope to do 
is to make ends meet by painstaking economy 
and scrupulous honesty of administration. 

The seriousness of the situation will be 
better appreciated if one keeps in mind the 
fact that all the local public officials such as 
magistrates and school teachers are paid 
such pittances that it is really impossible 
for them to devote themselves to public 
service. In the past even these pittances 
have been irregularly paid, while by contrast 

20 



the president has been paid the apparently 
exhorbitant salary of $2,000 a month plus 
funds for expenses. 

Let us consider the situation from another 
view-point. Haiti is purely agricultural. 
This agriculture is extremely primitive and 
a competent observer has stated that in 1915 
not over 1000 acres in the entire country 
were well cultivated. The great estates 
rapidly went to pieces after the expulsion of 
the French. In the century from 1819 to 
1919 no sugar was exported and all the 
refined sugar used was imported. Cane has 
been grown and has been consumed locally, 
in part raw, turned into coarse brown sugar 
in part, but to a considerable extent has been 
converted into rum. The peasants left the 
large estates to take small holdings for 
themselves. They have continued to pick 
the coffee berries from the semi wild plants 
left by the French but they have established 
no coffee plantations. Yet the tax on 
coffee, three cents a pound, yields about one- 
third of the national income. Draft animals 
and plows are hardly known and the peasant 
uses the machete almost to the exclusion of 
other agricultural implements. The crop 
gathered it is carried to market on the heads 
of the women, or on the backs of burros, 
facetiously known as "Haitian nightingales," 
over trails about as hard to imagine as to 
describe. Because of the prohibition of land 
ownership there have been few agricultural 
developments in the hands of foreigners . In 
spite then of the density of population the 
country could be made to produce vastly 



21 



greater crops of sugar, coffee, cotton, fruit 
and other valuable commodities than it has. 
There are sections adapted to stock raising 
such as the upper Artibonite Valley and the 
Plain of St. Michel, an opportunity utilized 
to some extent, but the disturbed political 
conditions of the last quarter century have 
almost destroyed this industry. 

There is practically no middle class in 
Haiti. There is a goodly group of shoe- 
makers in the various towns, some carpen- 
ters, masons, and other skilled or semi- 
skilled laborers. The visitor notices, how- 
ever, that if he finds a little cigar factory he 
will discover a Cuban or Dominican at its 
head. If he seeks to have his glasses 
repaired the worker comes from Jamaica or 
Martinique. He finds many Haitians in 
charge of small shops but he also finds that 
nearly all the larger enterprises are in the 
hands of foreigners, most of whom are 
Europeans. Even in the higher business 
circles he is freely told that in days gone by 
all big money was made not by taking a 
legitimate profit on merchandise bought or 
sold but by speculating in local money, by 
dodging customs duties with the aid of dis- 
honest officials, or by financing revolution- 
ary and anti-revolutionary movements. Any 
real investment in enterprises which would 
be of permanent value to the country, 
whether by natives or foreigners, has been 
almost non-existent. The foreigner has 
sought to make his money in the quickest 
and easiest way possible and then to get out, 
while the native who prospered has pre- 

22 



ferred to go to Europe to spend his accumu- 
lation. "Why should I visit the interior of 
the country?" said a man to me: " There are 
many more interesting places if I have the 
time and the money." 

Has your imagination supplied the many 
details which I have omitted? If not, let 
me summarize a bit. There are two Haities, 
not one, though their geographical bounda- 
ries are the same. The one is a pagan world 
from Africa covered by a very thin veneer 
of Christianity. It has lost the tribal ethics 
of Africa and has not gained a concept of 
national life save in the sense of unity 
against the outsider. It has the virtues 
and defects of primitive man. Its critical 
judgments are rudimentary and its thought 
is really centered on the problem of exist- 
ence. Boundless superstition typifies its 
mind. It has possibilities. 

The second, upper, smaller Haiti, has 
reached the point described by the poet in 
the lines: 

"We are going to live in cities, 
We are going to fight in wars, 
We are going to eat three times a day 
Without the natural cause, 

We are going to wear great piles of stuff 

Outside our proper skins, 
We are going to have Diseases: 

And Accomplishments; And Sins." 

This group has apppropriated unto itself 
the language and law as well as the wine 
and dance of France. It has added bacon 
and automobiles as well as poker and bridge 
from the United States. It seeks in other 

23 



words to be one of us. With this desire we 
must be very sympathetic and yet we must 
not allow our sympathy to blind us to the 
fact that it takes a long time to change the 
ideals of a group. This higher class wants 
to build first the superstructure. It has not 
learned the lesson of " noblesse oblige." It 
thinks of itself as the master of the mass. 
Until this upper class is ready to sacrifice 
itself for its country instead of seeking to 
secure a life of ease for itself, democracy in 
Haiti will remain but a term. Outsiders 
may help or hinder this process but the real 
change must come from within. 

Hitherto we have been considering the 
problems of Haiti as if they concerned no 
one else. Such is far from being the case. 
In no small measure the welfare of Haiti 
turns on the attitude of other countries and 
her success or failure affects others as well. 
It is necessary, then, to inquire into our 
relations to Haiti. 

Perfection on this earth is achieved only 
in theory. We speak of mathematics as 
perfect, but it is difficult for two surveyors to 
get the same result. So in the social realm 
man worked long to evolve a statement of 
individual relationships which would prevent 
the exploitation of the weak by the strong 
before he finally arrived at the individualistic 
philosophy of the XVIII Century with its 
emphatic declarations of "equality" and 
" inalienable rights." In theory then all 
men are equal before the law but in actual 
life we know with what care that theory 
must be applied. We do not treat the idiot 



and the insane as we treat the normal man, 
nor the child as we treat the adult. 

Just now the center of interest has shifted 
from the individual to the inter-relations of 
groups of individuals in the desire to secure 
a working philosophy which will prevent the 
exploitation of weak groups for the sel- 
fish advantage of strong groups. With this 
desire we are all in accord but we must 
recognize that the result sought is not to 
be achieved by the enunciation of some 
catchy phrase such as " self-determination of 
peoples," for everything depends on the 
interpretation given thereto. " Survival of 
the fittest" had a definite place in the field 
of biology, but shifted to the political realm 
it caused much confusion. Individual rights 
are those privileges granted the individual 
by the society of which he is a member. I 
have a right to life as long as I do not com- 
mit the acts punished by death. When, 
therefore, we speak of " group rights" we 
are either asserting that any group can do 
anything it has the power to do, and thus 
justify the German attitude towards Bel- 
gium, or we are assuming the existence of 
certain inter-group standards which any 
given group should observe and, note well, 
in the long run will be compelled to observe. 
As the world becomes more and more of a 
unit with the development of trade and 
transportation, we must expect to see the 
establishment of central agencies which we 
may call leagues of nations. Into this dis- 
cussion I cannot enter. I am but warning 
you of the danger of catch phrases and sug- 

25 



gesting that in the near future no group of 
people will be allowed exclusive jurisdic- 
tion of any area of earth unless it recognizes 
inter-group standards and develops a sense 
of responsibility, any more than society 
gives the individual unlimited jurisdiction 
of what we call private property. The 
history of the doctrine of " states rights" in 
our own country should be enlightening on 
this point. 

I think no one will question the fact that 
the United States has always desired the 
success of Haiti and that today we all wish 
her not only success but complete inde- 
pendence. Personally I think that her 
independence during the last century was 
made possible by the American attitude. It 
remains true, nevertheless, that the con- 
tinued troubles in Haiti which were produc- 
ing a condition of anarchy, gave our govern- 
ment great concern. It would surprise 
most Americans to know how often we 
have felt forced to send our gunboats to the 
island to try to limit the damage done, or 
to learn that prior to 1915 American officers 
have gone from port to port asking revolution- 
ary leaders not to destroy the towns or do 
other needless harm. Nevertheless our tra- 
ditional "hands-on" " policy was so strong 
that we did not intervene until unexpectedly 
forced to do so in 1915. 

Into the details of that intervention I 
need not enter and a crude sketch will 
suffice. Actuated solely, as I believe, by a 
desire to help Haiti and not for hidden com- 
mercial or financial reasons, the United 



26 



States determined to put an end to the 
reign of anarchy by maintaining the govern- 
ment which the Haitians might choose 
against change by revolution. In order to 
put the country on a firm basis it deter- 
mined to straighten out the finances and to 
control the collection of revenue. It did not 
seek to eliminate the Haitian government 
nor to interfere with local institutions. With 
these aims and others which I need not 
mention the Haitian leaders were in hearty 
accord, for they were despondent over the 
situation and had lost confidence in their 
own power to maintain an orderly govern- 
ment. Dartiguenave was elected by the 
Haitians and, thanks to American pro- 
tection, finishes next month his seven year 
term of office. In the effort to maintain 
order the Americans have done some un- 
expected things, both good and bad. The 
country has been policed and banditry 
stamped out. The peasant is safer as 
regards life, limb and property than he has 
been in a century and he knows it. The 
income of the country has been honestly col- 
lected with the exception of part of the 
internal revenue not under American con- 
trol where the old system of graft has con- 
tinued. Certain other improvements have 
been made but the sum total is not grati- 
fying to our pride or satisfactory to the 
Haitians. 

It must be admitted that the representa- 
tives of the State Department faced a 
difficult task when they drew up the con- 
vention of 1915. There was every desire 

27 



to maintain the government of Haiti as a 
reality and to encroach upon it as little as 
possible. Yet, it was necessary to give real 
power to the officials to be appointed under 
the convention if its intent was to be 
realized. The language of the convention 
seems to me to be open to sharp criticism 
for it is susceptible of different interpre- 
tations. I have been assured both by 
Americans and Haitians who took part in 
the negotiations that there was mutual 
understanding of its provisions and a clear 
recognition of its consequences. Haiti 
agreed to appoint certain men on the nomi- 
nation of the President of the United States, 
the chief of whom was perhaps the financial 
advisor, and Haiti also agreed to put his 
advice into effect. As a matter of fact this 
has not been done, but the Convention pro- 
vides no method for meeting such a refusal, 
although it does provide a method for keep- 
ing order. We were thus confronted with 
the possibility of a deadlock if the Haitian 
government refused to cooperate. In other 
words we put ourselves into a position where 
the onus of failure could be put on us without 
clear power to control the situation if neces- 
sary. My guess is that when Haiti dis- 
covered that the United States had no real 
program and no intention of maintaining a 
firm policy, the present result became a 
certainty. 

It must be admitted further that the 
establishment of military, financial, and 
diplomatic representatives not only inde- 
pendent of each other but under no common 

28 



head did not make either for peace or effi- 
ciency. It is gratifying to note that this 
has now been changed and a high com- 
missioner appointed. Unfortunately his 
task has been made doubly difficult by the 
events of the last seven years. Inasmuch 
as changes in the convention could not 
now be secured, all that can be done is for 
the United States to say what it under- 
stands by the same, to outline a policy and 
to stick to it. In my opinion this will be all 
that is needed. 

The failure to settle the internal loans and 
to take active steps to refund the debt has 
subjected us to great criticism, in part, at 
least, well founded. This failure has in- 
jured our prestige and is not easy to ex- 
plain. I am glad to say that I believe this 
matter will soon be adjusted. 

In 1915 there were many Haitians who 
felt that we should dismiss the local govern- 
ment and assume complete control for the 
time being. There are some who feel that 
we shall be obliged to do this even yet. 
Such action was not desired by our govern- 
ment, nor would it have been supported by 
our people. I am among those who believe 
that we can secure reasonable cooperation 
from the Haitians if we show both tact and 
firmness in dealing with them. Whatever 
they may say for publication they do not 
believe that we are trying to destroy their 
sovereignty. They feel rather that we have 
not done a good job and they want us to 
make good or quit. 



Haiti is by no means of one opinion as to 
the best course to follow now. The great 
mass of the peasants are well content with 
the present situation, save when some agi- 
tator arouses them by appealing to preju- 
dice against the foreigner. Everything that 
goes wrong now is charged to the American, 
from the financial depression which affects 
Haiti as well as the rest of the world to the 
drying up of a little brook which was said to 
carry plenty of water prior to our advent. 
There are able and intelligent men who 
think it better that they be allowed to 
struggle along even though this involves 
constant revolution and bankruptcy. For 
these men I have great respect. There 
are others equally competent who see no 
solution unless we continue our active 
assistance and who beg us not to withdraw. 
There are some who fawn on us in hopes of 
political preferment through our assistance, 
whom I despise. Nor am I greatly worried 
by the crocodile tears of would be exploiters 
of fellow men who want us to leave at once 
in order that they may be free to follow 
their own devices. 

I have indicated that there are elements 
both of success and failure in our experi- 
ment so far. It behooves us to remember 
that complete success would not in itself 
necessarily justify the continuance of the 
present policy, nor would complete failure 
be in itself a reason for our withdrawal from 
the enterprise. What we must do is to take 
account of stock and determine our duty 
in the matter, and, having decided, to take 

30 



whatever steps may be necessary to make 
our policy effective. Viewed from this 
angle there are three possible courses: 

1. Withdraw from Haiti but let other 
nations intervene should they so desire. 

2. Withdraw and refuse to intervene again 
on any ground and refuse to let other nations 
intervene. 

3 . Continue the present intervention mak- 
ing whatever changes in our program that 
experience may dictate. 

I know no one who favors the first course, 
for we all recognize that we do not intend 
to let any other country control the island. 

The second course has many advocates. 
I was formerly in favor of this policy 
myself, but first-hand acquaintance with the 
problem led me to change my views. It 
has the advantage of involving no respon- 
sibility on our part and of being purely 
negative. The fundamental difficulty with 
it is that it solves nothing; that it permits 
the continuance of the old regime with all of 
its horrors; and that in the long run we 
might be forced to abandon it under pres- 
sure from other nations. 

I have come therefore to feel that we 
should follow the third course. I am fully 
conscious of the difficulties and dangers 
involved, but it seems to me the only way in 
which we can really meet our obligations. 

Let us make sure that the situation is 
clearly before us. There is no antagonism 
between Haiti and the United States and we 
are not at war with Haiti. All that we ask 



31 



is that Haiti shall be so conducted that she 
may keep her obligations and not become a 
source of danger to us at any future time. 
We do not want to impair the sovereignty 
of the Haitian government nor do we covet 
any of Haiti's territory. Just as it is some- 
times an individual's duty to pull another 
person out of the mud or save his life when 
he seeks to destroy himself, so I believe it 
may be a nation's duty to save another in 
some time of emergency for, as I have 
already said, these groups are not isolated 
but have many and close relations. The 
man who burns his own house may burn 
mine unwittingly, and I am involved re- 
gardless of his intentions. The causes of 
the World War did concern us, though it 
took some of us a long time to find it out. 
It will take even longer to repair the damage 
it did us. 

If then it be granted that we are con- 
cerned with what goes on in Haiti and are 
justified in asking that there be a rule of 
law and not of anarchy on the island, what 
other difficulties may we encounter? I will 
mention four. 

With the present organization of the 
State Department we cannot be sure that a 
competent man of mature judgment will be 
found in charge of the questions that may 
arise in connection with Haiti. To illus- 
trate, let me quote from a recent letter. 
" Important matters in the hands of a suc- 
cession of young men. You hit the spot 
exactly. Coming back from the West 
Indies my business took me to the Latin 

32 



American division, where I found Mr. A. 
in charge. I returned to New York and 
going back within a few days on the same 
matter I found Mr. B. in charge. A few 
weeks after that while I was getting ready 
to go to Port-au-Prince I found Mr. C. in 
charge. Returning from there and arriving 
in Washington I found Mr. B. in charge. 
Last week I was informed that Mr. B. had 
resigned; Mr. C. has temporary charge and 
a new man is to be appointed. I do hope a 
really experienced and broad-minded man 
will get the position and hold it for at least 
a reasonable time." It should be possible 
to remedy this difficulty. 

The second grows out of the fact that men 
may be chosen to represent us in Haiti 
because of partisan political services here 
rather than because of fitness for the position 
to which they are sent. If, however, we 
assume the responsibilities which go with 
the suggested course, I cannot imagine that 
the president would nominate or Congress 
approve this type of man. 

The third grows out of our custom of shift- 
ing our marines and other military men in 
accordance with some time-schedule. As a 
matter of fact we should have a foreign 
legion both of officers and men, specially 
trained in so far as might be necessary, and 
kept at a given task as long as necessary 
with due regard for health. It is little short 
of criminal to send raw recruits, whether 
officers or men, to a place where their 
conduct has great political and social 
significance. 

33 



The fourth is that I believe Congress 
should immediately and formally approve 
or disapprove any such action as that taken 
in Haiti by the State Department. It is, of 
course, foolish to assert as has been done 
that Congress did not approve this action, 
indirectly at least. It accepted the Con- 
vention by passing a law permitting the 
officers of the Marine Corps to serve in the 
Haitian Gendarmerie. It has voted the 
appropriations necessary for the mainte- 
nance of the men there. I am but indicating 
that I consider more formal action desirable 
in all such cases. 

Inasmuch as there are indications that our 
government intends to follow substantially 
the course I have outlined, we might well 
ask what other steps if any should be taken, 
here or in Haiti. 

In Haiti I favor interfering as little as 
possible with local institutions, except to 
make studies and recommendations on the 
invitation of the Haitians. I would not 
attempt to reform the courts, much as they 
need it, nor would I try to develop a new 
school system. Haiti should be free to 
develop its own agencies except where the 
outside world is directly involved. It will 
be necessary to extend our financial super- 
vision to secure absolute honesty in han- 
dling of funds. It will be necessary to main- 
tain provost courts for the protection of our 
own men and it will be necessary to prohibit 
the press from instigating revolt. We shall 
keep as many marines on the island as may 
be needed to make insurrection impossible 

34 



and we shall develop the Gendarmerie as 
rapidly as possible into a competent police 
force. In other words, we shall carry out the 
Convention, whose intent and spirit were 
good. 

At home we might well consider the 
advisability of putting Haiti on the same 
basis as Cuba as regards our tariff laws. If 
we want Haiti to buy from us, we must 
make it possible for her to sell to us. 

More important than the suggestions just 
made would be a frank declaration from 
Congress to Haiti and to the world at large 
that we have no hidden designs on Haiti; 
that we shall welcome the coming of the 
time when we can withdraw all our troops, 
but that we propose to remain until a spirit 
of law and order manifests itself which 
makes possible an orderly government. 
Haiti will always be willing to enter into a 
defensive and offensive alliance with us if 
desired in return for our guarantee of her 
independence. 

Thus in bold outline I have tried to sketch 
some of the more important features of the 
present situation. I see no possible ground 
of antagonism between Haiti and the United 
States and I am confident that if we ap- 
proach the questions in a courteous way we 
shall find happy solutions and that the 
Haitians will trust and admire us in the 
future as they have in the past. 



35 



HWfi 



\ 



